Some Northside Residents Don't Want Low Income Apartments Either

 

Imagine a brand new apartment complex that provides after-school care for your kids, a playground suited to all ages, a community computer lab/library, and 24-hour security. Zimmerman Properties hopes to construct just that at the corner of 33rd St. and North Bryant Blvd.

“Maplewood Park” could possibly become home for some low to moderate income residents in the future, if it beats out the “Outlook on Valleyview” project proposed in Southland. Both are competing for the same nine-percent Housing Tax Credit along with projects in Midland and Odessa.

“What we are planning on building here is going to be something that you are going to be very proud of. Once we finish with it, we are going to be proud of it,” said Paul Holden, representative for Zimmerman Properties. “Maplewood Park” will have 72 units. Forty of those will be two bedrooms, two bathrooms, leaving the other 32 units as three bedrooms, two bathrooms units. According to Holden, each door carries a price tag of $115,000-$120,000 to construct. The complex construction cost as a whole is estimated at somewhere in the $7.5- 8 million range.

It will be a fenced property that sits closer to the middle of the block facing W. 33rd St. The strip of property close to the highway is zoned for commercial use, and has potential to be used a shopping center.

Just like the “Outlook on Valleyview” project, the rent at “Maplewood Park” will vary based on a sliding scale dependent upon your occupancy size, up to $875 per month. Some requirements for occupancy include: a criminal background check, credit history, written verification of employment, agree to a written credit bureau report, hold no open judgments or liens against you, and your gross income must provide at least three times the cost of rent per month.

Zimmerman Properties, LLC will own and maintain the property for at least the first 15 years, after that the option to sell is then on the table. But, Holden says he has never known for Zimmerman to actually ever sell any of its properties. Holden explained that maintence personnel, an apartment manager and security are all on site for assurance a tight ship is run.

“We have to continue to own it, and if we’re going to own it we are going to make sure it looks good from the street, and has a nice appeal to it,” he said.
Appearance of the property was just one of the concerns voiced by area homeowners.  There were concerns about an increase or decrease in property value, and property tax, traffic/accident problems, and higher crime rates.

The complaint of an escalation in crime during the summer when kids are out of school was brought to light. Both residents that spoke gave examples of their own personal experiences with theft and vandalism, laying blame heavily on the existing complex, and unsupervised, latch key kids.

“We have enough problems with the apartment complex that is already there,” said one woman. “We don’t need another one filled with more,” said one woman.

“We need to have some kind of [program] coming in and pick up kids and take them to the YMCA, something for them to do in the summer,” said Alan Culver, an area resident since 1999. “A park or skate park that is close to the area and not across a dangerous highway would be nice. The kids need something.”

There was discussion about traffic control in the area by way of adding speed bumps along the residential street the complex entrance will face, and possible traffic lights at the highway front.

The lot Zimmerman Properties would like to build the complex on has been vacant for many years.  According to Bob Salas, City of San Angelo Neighborhood Services Director, this would be the first time a company has expressed interest in building something there.

It is clear that coordination between the developer, residents, and the city, through various departments will be needed to lay the groundwork for a successful apartment community in the area chosen.
Zimmerman Properties, LLC will go before city council on Mar. 17 where Zimmerman Properties will present a more detailed blueprint of exact plans and request a letter of resolution in support from the councilmembers.

Mayor Dwain Morrison and Councilman Marty Self both agreed that the plans for the new apartment complex sounds nice, but raise a lot of questions, and put a spotlight on issues.

“I think that the people (residents) that spoke were very informative. I think they had some valid concerns, and I think we need to address them before we move forward with this,” said Marty Self. “Traffic and crime rate is a big concern, and those problems are already present with the complex or without, we need to address the problem that exists already.”


 

Subscribe to the LIVE! Daily

The LIVE! Daily is the "newspaper to your email" for San Angelo. Each content-packed edition has weather, the popular Top of the Email opinion and rumor mill column, news around the state of Texas, news around west Texas, the latest news stories from San Angelo LIVE!, events, and the most recent obituaries. The bottom of the email contains the most recent rants and comments. The LIVE! daily is emailed 5 days per week. On Sundays, subscribers receive the West Texas Real Estate LIVE! email.

Required

Most Recent Videos

Comments

that they says it's low income housing yet expect people to make at least 3 times what their rent is. especially since it can go up to $875 for rent. that doesn't seem very low income and I also find it funny that when the people on the south side objected they were called racist yet the people on the north side object and no one says anything

Where's the outrage now? People on the Northside don't want it either. Now that it's in your neighborhood is not such agood idea anymore is it. according to the requirements is doesn't seem like it will be too easy for low income families to get a apartment. So what's going to happen in grandma or grandpa, mom or dad with good record and some credit are going to get the lease in their name and let their kids move in to the apartment that qualify for it if they applied theirselves. Is management going to actually go around and check the occupants? I doubt that.

If you keep giving handouts to lower income, (wic, gas for transportation, medicade, lonestar, c.h.i.p.s., daycare, cellphone w/free minutes and text, hud, lower monthly payments on housing),they are going to keep taking. When is it going to stop. I need my tax money to support my family not someone else's.

There are sooooo many issues here, overlapping issues, contradictory issues, REAL issues.
What makes the occupant of "affordable housing" undesirable in a neighborhood and can we do something about THAT? We ALL need housing we can afford, so the word "affordable" must be polite-speak for subsidized. There is resentment when money is coming out of our pockets to subsidize anyone for ANYthing. There is a feeling that doing a favor for any group that accepts help for housing costs is only going to bite us somewhere (no good deed goes unpunished). There is a feeling that once you latch onto the government teat there is no letting go, a sign of weakness. Maybe we want some better criteria established for "need". How many times every week does your diet stray from beans, rice, peanut butter, and jelly? Government aid that stepped in at a time of economic disaster, think Great Depression, was meant to prevent you having to clear away bodies to get your car out of the driveway, not provide a standard of living to which anyone would aspire. We want to know that we aren't living poorly and paying for someone to have better surroundings than our own. So what else is going on here? There are strict requirements for anyone who wants to live in this affordable housing and what looks like a huge contradiction. On the one hand, an occupant must be earning 3 times their rent. Well, that's great. Statistics show that if you are earning less than 3 times your rent you are more likely to be party to an eviction and frequent evictions in a complex is a social and economic disaster for the entire community. And yet, if the rent is on a sliding scale, wouldn't that rent have been established to meet the criteria? Something wrong with this contradiction. Is the "affordable" designation actually about getting a tax break for the management company? Those listed criteria are as rigid as any for luxury apartments, therefore rendering ineligible most anyone who might apply. You are either building housing for folks who would otherwise be unable to find it or you are taking advantage of some sort of government deal and making sure no one but the cream can qualify. If you are able to establish that list of criteria, would it not be a positive action to also mandate a few hours of tenant classes, offered several times weekly FOREVER, required for prospective tenants, maybe twice a year to continue to address situations that come up. We in Rural America may be more conscious of the strains connected with proximity of other humans. Not everyone has the choice of space, so we can continue to listen to increasing accounts of domestic disturbances evry morning or we can do some educating and maybe cool things down before they catch fire. How do you turn neighborhood objections around? Educate and civilize the tenants. I come from a town where a large influx of political refugees was dumped, a little too large for seamless assimilation. No one thought to educate them, it was the East Coast, where everyone is on the Government Gimmee, they just handed out rent vouchers. These folks came from places with no flush toilets. After the toilets were full, the apartments declined somewhat in desirability. An extreme reality to make a point. Providing daycare is a preemptive strike against unemployment and neglect, but the basic instruction about living in close contact with others is just not happening. Ah, but that's not your tenant is it? It's young families who are fully employed and getting their start, right? Soooo the neighborhood is concerned about gangs and idle kids and the landlords are citing all the criteria for occupancy as reasons for the neighborhood to feel comfortable, as though Mom and Dad out working is going to prevent the kids from getting into trouble. What reality do THEY live in? Of course if credit checks and background checks and employment criteria are adhered to, well, none of these other issues will ever be a problem because the units will sit empty.

Post a comment to this article here: